Friday, July 13, 2018

Weekend Placeholder 2 : Place Harder

See. I like you guys so much I woke up early to put this in here (not really but I have a few minutes).

Nats need to finish this out 2-1. They didn't get what they wanted from the Pirate series BUT 3-1 vs the Mets ensure 7-4 and basically stability, which is enough to keep hope alive. 4-0 would be better as it almost guarantees games gained but right now we are in triage. 3-1 should gain games on someone ahead of the Nats and avoid disaster. 2-2? That could be disaster.

They did beat the Mets but barely and with Max on the mound so what can we say?

OK I gotta run. Have fun and see you at the All-Star Game because I will remain hopeful that one of my legions will magically provide me with tickets. Suite tickets. Also sweet tickets. And maybe sweets

54 comments:

They've got to play a lot better and they are still not. The good news is the 2nd half schedule doesn't look particularly hard and there 9 H-H games against both the Phillies and Braves. If Stras comes back and pitches like he did in the 2nd half last season, that should be a big help.

I'm not reading much into the headline, but the article data is telling. We lead the league in "tough losses" by losing 14 games in which our SP puts up a quality start. That is 3 more than the Mets and Orioles. Hmmm. But reading further makes me realize that it's deeper than that: this relates to what some of us were talking about with respect to how our hitters handle the shift. We have a hell of knack for failing to get that lead-off hitter on base each inning. With the bases empty, we have a 71.6% out rate, the highest in the NL. Across the MLB, only BAL, MIN, TOR, and LAA produce more outs with the bases empty. The glaring figure? Bryce Harper, who creates an out almost 80% of the time when he is the first batter of the inning.

Funny thing is, he is one of those hitters with the shift. So to revisit Murphy's comments about wanting to get on second base. Asking his teammates behind him to hit three singles is apparently asking a lot, but how about as a lead-off hitter of an inning, you get on base period. We'll worry about second base later. Bryce Harper is getting out 80% of the time, with the help of hitting right into the shift. He, and Murphy presumably, won't hit the other way because they are more concerned with hitting a double or a HR than greatly increasing the odds of making it a 2-out inning. Ever wonder why we win games 5-4 with 3 HR? We do not manufacture runs, we hit solo shots.

After seeing this article and those Bryce numbers with the bases empty, I fully believe this is what has plagued the Nats for some time. It's not arrogance, like I stated yesterday. It's a genuine refusal to change one's approach given a particular situation, because they don't want to rely on 3 singles behind them. That is ridiculous. Bryce, you have a runner on 3rd? Blast away my friend. But bases empty? You lead the league in walks and are our best OBP guy. Get on base at all costs.

@Ole PBN - I grew up on Long Island and have relatives that are Mets fans. They were never fans of Kevin Long because they thought he focused too much on getting his players to hit home runs and extra base hits at all costs rather than "doing the little things" (shorten your swing with 2 strikes, go the other way, get the runner over to 3rd with less than 2 outs etc.). After watching the Nats approach this season, I definitely see where they're getting it from.

Did we ever get a good explanation of why they let Schu go this offseason? After all, they retained Henley so it's not like the entire coaching staff was purged when Dusty was fired.

@OPBN That's an interesting observation and statistics. Isn't that about leadership too then? Certainly Rizzo, Davey, and their staffs can see this as well?

In order to get to 90 wins, which Harper seems to see as a reasonable goal to make the post season, the Nats need to go 43-26. That's a .623 win pace. Over the course of a season that is 100 win pace. They've never won 100 games. They better find a way to turn their luck around because they're going to need all the luck they can get.

@G Cracka X - perhaps because the Mets had the heart of their order due up in the 8th? Herrera faced Nimmo, Cabrera, Bautista, Conforto, Flores, and den Dekker. Madson faced Plawecki, Reyes, and Rosario (pinch hitting for the pitcher).

While we are doing better this year in terms of hitting with RISP, everyone I stated earlier is so backwards, its mind-boggling. I wasn't really a fan of Schu for no other reason than I didn't like our approach as a unit back then, but I'm now starting to wonder if Kevin Long is doing more harm than good. Could've been his fault, or not at all, I have no idea.

Then again, it could be that players are just going to be themselves regardless of what a hitting coach says. For all we know, Long could be the magic behind Soto, although Soto does demonstrate an ability to adjust his approach mid-at-bat - something his teammates are incapable of.

I don’t think it would take any significant prospects (not kieboom or Robles IOW). Maybe a couple B prospects. Ramos for 2 months isn’t going to be as expensive as Herrera for 3. BTW Nick Cafardo of Boston Globe says Nats have scouts at rays games and rays has scouts at Nats minor leagues. So I think this will happen. Although Nats should also consider Chirinos of Rangers as a backup.

@GCrackaX: Davey M. said that he used Herrera to match up against the top of the Met's lineup. That's some outside the box thinking that Dusty would never have done. Of course, Herrera did give up a run, but who knows, Madson could have done worse. It's a strange thing for me to be hoping they bring Kintzler in rather than Madson.

No chance Long had any effect on Soto. Guy arrived with same approach and success he has now before long could get hands on him. Although guys here’s the thing and nobody wants to hear this because it’s not satisfying. Without the increase in shifts (double number of shifts from prior years) and a normal BABIP, Bryce’s year is more like .265/.400/.530. Only difference if you look at underlying numbers is his whiff rate and K rate is up, but not in a crazy way. Rendon is hitting like his best self. Trea has made progress this year in his approach, walking more than he has. Matt Adams has hit great. Soto. The main culprit for the Nats offensive difficulties is absence from injuries (meaning too many ABs to players like Difo and Severino) and underperformance from injury (Murphy). Literally Bryce Harper is the only player on the roster you can say has regressed at the plate in a way that has nothing to do with health. The problem is not Kevin long. Every single fanbase thinks it’s players have bad situational hitting with RISP and moving runners etc. Kevin Long is not the problem. Injuries injuries injuries. And no. They’re not all back yet. Because Murphy still isn’t Murphy and Zim isn’t back (and Reynolds is all of nothing) and Eaton has had zero (ZERO) pop since returning.

So to summarize, what’s the complaint about Kevin Long? Bryce having a down year? That’s *mostly* a shift and luck problem. He’s hitting ball as hard as ever, but with a bit more swing and miss thrown in. Is that from long? I dunno. But what other healthy player is not hitting up to his normal level? I can’t think of a single one.

Bx, I think you read this from my post: "I'm starting to wonder if Kevin Long is doing more harm than good" and ran with it. The point is our hitters not adjusting to the shift. Not because they can't, but because - straight from the horse's mouth - they WON'T. I think that is incredibly idiotic and I have yet to see a good rationale for the argument against OBP.

All these years I thought coaching had a bigger impact on the game than it really does. The clear answer is, no, it doesn't. Aside from clubhouse personality management, running a bullpen, knowing when to challenge, knowing when to take a pitcher out of the game (all of which are not small tasks), it is in fact the players who run this game. A player's refusal to slap a single toward a WIDE OPEN portion of the field, and no system in our clubhouse to hold those fools accountable, is the problem.

Many of us have brought that issue up before, but some of us (I know I have) have had the sneaking suspicion that it's easier said than done: to hit/bunt to the empty part of the field. Now we know. They would rather try for the solo shot or double and risk an out at a much higher rate, than to simply get on base. It's asinine and I wish the game had a place in it for a coach to direct that ideology in the right direction. Hopeless, apparently.

@OlePBN: FP made a really interesting point last night about how hard it might be to hit away from the shift. He noted that it's not easy at all to hit the other way, because the pitcher is "pitching to the shift" -- that is, assuming a left-handed batter, the pitcher is making most of his pitches inside, which would require an inside-out swing to hit to the opposite field. I think it's a really good point, but I want to watch some games to see how much pitcher's really "pitch to the shift". Seems to be that guys like Soto and Eaton, and in the past Murphy, are quite adept at going to the opposite field and undermining the shift. If they are only seeing inside pitches, this would be really hard to do. I'm thinking that they may see a majority of inside pitches, but they are good enough hitters to poke a pitch on the outside corner of the plate to the opposite field. Eaton seems to be the master of this. Murphy used to be terrific at this too. And I recall that Bryce used to do this just enough to make managers soften the shift on him.

I don't agree with Murphy that he should be looking for a double because it's hard to string together three singles. I do agree that it is hard to string together three singles. But if you are batting with no one on base, with power hitters behind you (which is not currently the case for Murphy), than your job is to get on base and let the next guy hit his double (or HR) to drive you in. Otherwise, you don't get on base at all, and if the next guy hits a double, no one scores. And maybe that is one of the reasons we see so many solo HRs.

@PotomacFan - Matt Carpenter made the same point about pitching to the shift, if I'm remembering the article right. The kinds of guys who get shifted on typically have long power swings, not well built for adjusting and making an inside out swing instead. And you've spent your whole life learning not to hit grounders to the shortstop, so doing it deliberately is not an easy or sure thing.

For those who haven't seen the Murphy quotes referenced above:http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24049347/mlb-hitters-explain-why-just-beat-shift

I thought these arguments were compelling, unlike apparently most people. I think MLB players know their bodies and skills, and the well paid, "innovative" statheads in the front offices appear not to be forcing a bunt/opposite field approach on the teams no matter how much FP and the fans yell about it. I think it's very unlikely to be as simple as we like to think.

Roark is averaging 2 baserunners per inning for the last couple months. It's Tanner.

With Wieters back, I have to remind myself that he's better than Severino. But watching him at the plate, I wonder how it's possible. He's so bad.

@Josh - I agree it's very tough to change what a hitter has done for years. That said, do they not even make an effort to adjust to take advantage of what's being given to them? They are paid to play baseball.

Then again, as if to prove Murphy's point... these guys are miserably bad at moving runners.

1) Tanner's FIP and xFIP suggest that he's been a bit unlucky this season. His ERA should be around 4.5 based on those two stats, which would average a quality start (6IP, 3ER). Obviously, you would like your starter to do better than that, but I think Tanner has the potential to improve after the ASB

2) Shawn Kelley's ERA is now 2.54! Unlike Tanner, he has been getting lucky, but if he keeps avoiding HRs as he has done lately, he could have a good 2nd half

3) After Eaton's 2-5 performance, the Nats now have 5 players with an OPS of .800 or above (Eaton, Soto, Rendon, Harper, and Adams). Turner's not too far off at .754. If the Nats swing a trade for Ramos, they could field a lineup with 6 .800 OPS bats in the lineup, plus Turner and Murph (who could have a strong 2nd half, we don't know). That would be a good lineup if they can all stay healthy

C needs to not be a sucking chest wound. Wieters has dropped 20 points off his wRC+ since returning to the lineup, plunging below Taylor and Murphy into Difo territory, though remaining above Severino and Kieboom. (For illustration purposes, Taylor's 81 wRC+ is still higher than Sevy and Kieboom's added together.)

Otherwise, I'm not sure what else there is to do. Harper is still an above-average hitter; with Soto, Eaton, and Taylor he helps make up a fine 4-man outfield. Rendon is one of the best players in the league, Taylor is good, and the Adams/Reynolds and Adams/Zim platoons at 1B produce excellent offense; it's just a matter of Davey being willing to keep the platoons going instead of just giving Zim the job outright. Rizzo already traded for Herrera to help the pen, who immediately fell into a hole. I'm not sure if an SP is available to bounce Roark (Hellickson has been adequate as a #5 while being used carefully, though you'd like to see someone go deeper in games). That just leaves C, and everyone's known that was an issue since before the season started, plus with Ramos hurt (there's a familiar phrase; I'm used to his injuries hurting the Nationals but now he's managing to pull it off when he isn't even on the team!) there isn't a lot of value out there on the market at the position.

One factor that makes the Nats' situation more difficult is that Philly and Atlanta both have the cap space and resources to add significant help to their teams. The Nats don't. I know Machado may wind up out of the NL East, but there are other upgrades out there and I expect both teams to add much more than the Nats can afford to or are willing to. The Nats rarely add payroll in-season and this year their situation is even tighter.

The good news is that the Phillies and Braves are simply not supposed to be this good and we should expect some regression in the other direction. The bad news is that 5.5 games is 5.5 games. The Nats have to play like the team they're supposed to be, not the team they've been thus far. (Added to the problems, teams like the Brewers, Diamondbacks, and Rockies are all there looking at the WC slots as well, so it's not just enough for the Nats to get their act in gear.)

Regarding G Cracka X's comment, taking a long-term selling position would be pointless: Soto, Robles, Eaton, and Turner are all high-grade, cost-controlled assets. Rendon and Doolittle will be around next year. Scherzer's signed long-term. Strasburg is signed long-term and isn't likely to opt out given his recurrent health issues unless the Nats punt on the future. That's far too much quality to abandon long-term.

However, if the team continues to crater through the next couple of weeks, I think Rizzo may well unload some expiring assets if he can get more for them than a QO would bring. For example, I wonder if, say, Houston would be interesting in renting a Bryce Harper* for the stretch run? Gio would be one of the more attractive possibilities in the rental-pitcher market. Madson might help somebody's pen if he recovers his form. Heck, maybe he can get somebody to give a lottery ticket prospect for Wieters if better options like Cervelli and Ramos keep getting hurt and the Nats eat the remaining salary. But that's a worst-case scenario.

*Win or lose, I still think that the Nationals are better served trying to extend Rendon than Harper, unless Soto totally falls off a cliff over the end of the year or Robles's injury is something awful and career-trajectory-threatening. The team has too many holes to sink huge amounts into Harper at a position that's not of need.

I found myself having heretical thoughts this weekend. The jogging to first on a double play (granted, it wouldn't have mattered), the really dumb, situationally unaware throw to 3rd on a base hit to center that ended up costing the team a run... I thought, "Bryce, stop making me hate you. I don't want to hate you."

I know he's a huge asset that we will miss dearly when he's mashing for some other team... but the little stuff irritates me, a lot.

I don't know about Robles for Realmuto. Didn't the Marlins originally want Robles AND Soto? So, I don't if just Robles is enough and I'd rather deplete the farm even further. Our outfield for the future is set up to be Soto (LF), Robles (CF), and Eaton (RF) with MAT off the bench. I like that lineup. There are also some questions. As good as Soto is now, is he going to crash? Will Eaton stay healthy? Will Robles pan out? But even still, Kieboom should be up by middle of next year and I'd like to think that our only hole then would be catcher. I see this as another run of young controllable talent that can keep us relevant, so I'm all in favor of keeping these pieces intact in DC. Additionally, assuming we can extend our hot hand of finding a 1B placeholder for an unreliable anchor contract in Zimm, this isn't a bleak outlook at all. So that's my argument for leaving Realmuto in Miami.

On the other hand, as I've mentioned before, there are so few stellar catchers out there. You can go grab or draft a plethora of talent that most likely will pan out. But behind the dish? That is so rare to find, especially at Realmuto's level of production. He's 27 with 2.5 more years of control. Similar to why we gutted out top-tier pitching talent for Eaton: productivity, control, and low cost.

I don't know what you do, but I think I'm more inclined to go after this guy in the offseason where we aren't in such a desperate situation to "save the season," as it might already be lost. Does anyone think we could negotiate a better deal once this season concludes?

Jon Quimby: Interesting point about Wieters, who despite his weak offense may have made a difference during the June meltdown. Maybe Gio would have not been so bad. No one's really saying it, but Severino's demotion, followed by an article questioning his "future in the organization," makes me wonder if Rizzo and Martinez think Sevi was at least partly responsible for the meltdown.

The Nats sit 5.5 back, 6 in the loss column. Strasburg missed approximately 6 starts. The Nats have been about .500 in his starts, so let's say they could have gone 3-3 in his starts and would be only 2.5 back. Let's say Wieters plays instead of Sevi and Gio is okay and the Nats go 2-2 instead of 0-4 during his losing streak. So now you're 0.5 out.

I am NOT a fan of Wieters, but clearly Sevi was below replacement level, and the Nats blew it at catcher for two years when they signed Wieters. That one is on Rizzo/Lerners, I guess. There were cheaper guys who are always good for about 1 or 2 WAR out there. Some of them go up and down (Avila, Castillo, Suzuki), but they are cheap, so you have resources to replace them. This was a big mistake--first tying up so much money in Wieters and second having no viable backup.

As for Strasburg, I think he will miss six starts a year going forward. I think you pencil him in for 26 or 27 starts and 12 to 15 wins. They should just plan on that; so they need a much better #3-4-5 situation. I hope they keep Hellickson and address the other two slots aggressively. I would LOVE a #2 kind of guy to bolster the rotation.

The scuttlebutt was that Wieters was a Lerner/Boras thing that was more or less foisted on Rizzo. Wonder how it would have panned out if Rizzo had stuck with his Derek Norris plan, and then had more money to play with when he didn't work out.

I agree that we should hang on to Robles and start him in 2018 and re-load through free agency in the key areas that need improvement (get a decent but cheap catcher, sign at least one really good starting pitcher, extend Rendon if possible).

However, if the Nats do trade for Realmuto now it would be a huge upgrade and since it would be two-plus years, I could almost live with losing Robles (but just barely) if we keep Kieboom and any other really good prospects. Frankly, I think getting someone as good as Realmuto is probably the ONLY chance for 2018. He might not be enough, but he fills a huge hole. I don't how good he is at calling a game, but he's probably one of the top three catchers in the game right now, if not #1.

But mostly I say wait till next year--flip some relievers for some good prospects if you're out of in August, hold on to Robles as an inexpensive, controllable starter for 2019, and use all the payroll space to add to a very good core.

I think that team would win about 79-80 games if healthy. Again, this is just the 'base'. You could easily get to upper 80s and possibly even to low 90s with free agent signings at C, SP, Bench, and Bullpen plus a Carter Kieboom mid-season promotion to the show.

I just don't see any way that the Nats trade Robles for Realmuto. 2.5 years of control v. 5 - 7 years of control -- and a low salary for Robles. The Nats have plenty of hitters in the line-up. They would be fine with a catcher who can hit .240 - .250 and call a good game. And, I don't think Realmuto puts them over the top for this year, unless he can also pitch every 5th game. And I always worry about catchers getting injured and missing significant time. I think it's better to have a decent catcher and a decent back up catcher (which, clearly, the Nats did not have for most of this year -- and it really hurt them).

So, I think the Nats pretty much hold still at the trade deadline. For next year, they need to sign Rendon, get a catcher, and get two pitchers. (That's a lot.)

PotomacFan: I agree with you. Just thought that Realmuto would be the only "get" that would make a real difference (unless there's another Verlander out there). Your point about Robles' low salary is well taken; Realmuto is bound to get a big bump each year in arbitration, so that would eat up money, too.

I think they should hold onto Robles, and strengthen the team through free agency and Kieboom. I don't know what the odds are that the Nats hit on Soto, Robles, AND Kieboom, but they might!

They could flip a couple of relievers to get some minor league depth back.

Sadly, despite our lofty expectations this year is not looking like the Nats' year.

G Cracka: Fangraphs is still using mostly projected performance, 538 is basing it all on the Nationals' actual performance (but I think based mostly or entirely on record as adjusted by strength of schedule, not looking to components or runs scored vs. runs allowed).

With grinning appearances, pleasant air and amicable arms, Karachi escorts our models endeavor not just to live up but instead beat their client's solicitations ensuring that no gaps are left for grievances. Another way through which Escorts in Karachi we attempt to make ourselves extraordinary as indicated by our particular clients is by outfitting quality administrations with a variety of decisions Independent Karachi Escorts.